Sure it works!
One of the best sprinters in France got a medal during the last World Champs... More and more people are using EOSkates frames in France and in Colombia. I'm pretty confident for the future of carbone frames... but be careful, there are significant differences between the different brands...

Anyone skating one regularly since the last thread who can give feedback based on what I said then? The EO is interesting to me...

Quote:

I agree with most of what you're saying, in theory - in practice though...

- Lighter weight friend of mine (who posts here) sold his (Tusa maybe?) carbon's because at his size, they were considerably less comfortable than aluminum frames with only marginal weight penalty.

- I've personally seen someone my size (200lb+) have a 'erector style' frame practically explode under his feet in front of me when we picked up from ~15mph on our way to top end.

Those are my two standout experiences, and the few other people I've seen with them over the years haven't given me any raving accolades, just that they're pretty good, but cost way too much.

What I can say though... I'd LOVE a frame as light as the Bont mag, that doesn't twist into a pretzel under my push (like it did). I'd love a frame as communicative and solid as the Sframe7, that weighs half as much, and feels comfy like a Cado on rough roads. Properly engineered carbon can do most of this on paper, but I don't think we have that product.

I'd pay a very sizable amount of money for that frame were it to turn up somewhere.

But I'm teetering on the fence about it because of the cost. $400-$425 isn't rediculously expensive compared to some of the top Al frames today. I would not want to drop that kind of coin on one to be disappointed in it's performance. The EO frame could very well be the best thing since sliced bread. My concern is that CF will be noticably more flexy than any Al frame. I belong to the group of skaters that prefers a very stiff/rigid frame - something that will transfer push power directly to the ground, and will not flex causing the wheels to get out of alignment with each other. I know CF is capable of this, I just don't know if the EO frame is thick enough (with enough layers of CF) to achieve such stiffness.

I do not have an EO frame and have never tried one - but I am 100% confident that the current EO production is a quality high performance product. In this era of $1300 boots, they really are not too expensive , taking the entire skate into consideration ($160 set of wheels, $200 set of bearings, etc.)

Doesn't EO have Yann Guyader riding on them for WIC?

I was waiting for a certain well known USA alum frame maker to weigh in with his expert opinion about how CF is unsuitable for a skate frame material.

CF frames made it to the podium of FIRS Worlds, European Championships, 1st place Leman 24 Roller, A2A 138km, NYC 100km, several national championships (of top skating nations,) WIC etc, back in 2007/08.

Monocoque style is a natural progression, just like in bike frames (1st was alum with CF tubes, next full CF.) However there are pro's and con's to both "CF rail" and "monocoque" construction skate frames.

My coach gave me a set of EO 4x110s on more or less permanent loan. Never to be sold or passed on which is fine with me - I'm incredibly grateful as it is for his help & advice. Not stiff enough for him, but damned if I can sense any flex. Not that I'm an expert or have any high end frames to compare but I like them.

Last August I went from 4-season-old Bont custom Vaypor 3-point boots with 4X110 mag S-frames to Simmons customs with EO carbon 3X110, 1X100 setup. the Simmons / EO setup weighs 6 ounces PER SKATE less than my old Bont setup. that's a very significant amount of weight saving, since you have to accelerate that weight in multiple directions with every push. You notice it immediately.

So far the frames have been bulletproof, and I really like them. I skated Montreal 24 hours, Skate of the Union marathon, and all fall and winter training, both indoors and out. I've had absolutely no problems. And EO has been good to deal with. I ordered frames via email and got them within a week.

You already saved weight on the wheels (4x110 vs. 3x110+1x100) and the Bont G4 wheels are also relatively heavy, 1/2 ounce heavier per wheel than the Matter Juice for instance, so if you switched to another brand, you probably also save some additional weight there.

jipe - I don't want to speak for Greg, but my prediction is that the weight savings came mostly from the boot and maybe the wheels as you mentioned.

I love Bont also, but switching from a 2007 Vaypor to a different brand of boot this past year made a world of difference from a weight perspective. This is purely a guess (and definitely not a fact), but I would say the Simmons are in the ballpark of being 100+ grams less PER BOOT than the Vaypor. That's huge. The difference in frame weight between the Bont Mag S-Frame and the EO is probably minimal. Actually, the Bont frame may weigh less. So, that 6 ounces, assuming it's accurate, had to come from the weight of the boots (and maybe the wheels as well).

Weight does have an impact. If the EO frames are performing as well as everyone says, then I think they're worth the money. The only 4x110 setup I've tolerated was a Bont setup I had a year or so ago. The frame on the boot was a 4x110 magnesium S-Frame. I believe the frame weighed like 90 grams, which is more than 100 grams lighter than most other 4x110 frames. I actually felt as comfortable on the 4x110 setup as I did my 3x110x100. The problem with the setup (I had) is that the frame didn't work. The axles wouldn't stay tight and it was basically a joke, as far as the performance of the frame. I tried locktite and all sorts of things and the axles kept coming loose. I actually had to pull out of a race because my axle came off and I lost a wheel (in the process). But, if the frame would have worked, I would probably still be on that same 4x110 setup today. Because again, a 100+ gram reduction makes a big difference.

I have a set of the EO frames that I'm anxiously waiting to use. I'll give some feedback once I try out the frames.

You already saved weight on the wheels (4x110 vs. 3x110+1x100) and the Bont G4 wheels are also relatively heavy, 1/2 ounce heavier per wheel than the Matter Juice for instance, so if you switched to another brand, you probably also save some additional weight there.

The Bont boots are excellent but noth the lightest one.

I want to make sure that you know the weight saving I reported is exclusive of the wheels. Of course there is a weight saving in going to the one 100mm wheel. That savings is not considered here. And I've been using the same wheels (Atom One these days) on both Bont and Simmons.

Specifics about the switch from Bont Vaypor, Bont mag S-frame to the Simmons Custom and EO frame:

The Bont Magnesium S-frame is close to 120 gms, as I recall. The EO Hi-Low frame is virtually identical in weight, but is 2-point mount, rather than 3-point for the Bont. The weight saving in my case was entirely in the boots, due to the change from 3-pt to 2-pt, and Simmons's attention to light weight. One thing that is often not recognized is that while 3-pt frames are lighter than their 2-point counterparts, the corresponding 3-point boot gains weight because the it must include an extra mounting boss in the middle, and the rear mount extends further downward at the heel of the boot compared to the 2-point mount. I don't think that this accounts for all of the difference in boot weight, but it has to be a large fraction of it.

weight saving in going to EO frames for a given 2-point setup is more easily calculated, being merely the difference in frame weights, provided that the wheel diameters are held constant. That's nominally 3 ounces per skate, compared to an aluminum frame at around 195 grams.

jipe - I don't want to speak for Greg, but my prediction is that the weight savings came mostly from the boot and maybe the wheels as you mentioned.

I love Bont also, but switching from a 2007 Vaypor to a different brand of boot this past year made a world of difference from a weight perspective. This is purely a guess (and definitely not a fact), but I would say the Simmons are in the ballpark of being 100+ grams less PER BOOT than the Vaypor. That's huge. The difference in frame weight between the Bont Mag S-Frame and the EO is probably minimal. Actually, the Bont frame may weigh less. So, that 6 ounces, assuming it's accurate, had to come from the weight of the boots (and maybe the wheels as well).

Weight does have an impact. If the EO frames are performing as well as everyone says, then I think they're worth the money. The only 4x110 setup I've tolerated was a Bont setup I had a year or so ago. The frame on the boot was a 4x110 magnesium S-Frame. I believe the frame weighed like 90 grams, which is more than 100 grams lighter than most other 4x110 frames. I actually felt as comfortable on the 4x110 setup as I did my 3x110x100. The problem with the setup (I had) is that the frame didn't work. The axles wouldn't stay tight and it was basically a joke, as far as the performance of the frame. I tried locktite and all sorts of things and the axles kept coming loose. I actually had to pull out of a race because my axle came off and I lost a wheel (in the process). But, if the frame would have worked, I would probably still be on that same 4x110 setup today. Because again, a 100+ gram reduction makes a big difference.

I have a set of the EO frames that I'm anxiously waiting to use. I'll give some feedback once I try out the frames.

Hi:

I just wanted to mention that the weights I measured are accurate values. I have scales with sensitivity at the 0.1 gm level, so I can make pretty good relative measurements. Measurement science is what i do professionally.

Speaking of weight reduction, why can't wheel manufacturers build wheels that have less weight on the perimeter? I know that there has to be the right amount of rebound for the wheel to work and that it's a combination of the urethane and hub that is supposed to produce this magic value, but has anyone ever tried installing a pressurized bladder inside the urethane in order to produce a certain rebound independent of urethane hardness and hub flex?

I will caution that a CF product has a low tolerance for damage. If it gets dinged scratched or scraped in a fall or other incident, it needs immediate proper repair. CF is very strong, but not durable. I don't have CF frames, but I spend all day working with one of the biggest CF products in the world and have 14 years experience repairing composite material products in aviation. Great product, just know what you are getting into as it is not maintenance free.

I will caution that a CF product has a low tolerance for damage. If it gets dinged scratched or scraped in a fall or other incident, it needs immediate proper repair. CF is very strong, but not durable. I don't have CF frames, but I spend all day working with one of the biggest CF products in the world and have 14 years experience repairing composite material products in aviation. Great product, just know what you are getting into as it is not maintenance free.

What you say is often posed as an argument against carbon. But it's a generalization that depends on the design. For example, good design for a part that is likely to see impacts means including some sort of sacrificial layer in the laminate that will prevent impacts from affecting the structural elements. I'm assuming that the EO frames include such. Also, part design issues often exist that preclude the optimum use of materials from a pure strength perspective. In the case of skate frames, frame mounting bolts, and wheel axle bosses introduce stress raisers into the design that are justifiably solved using a brute-force approach, particularly if a more elegant, lighter approach has significant downsides. Downsides I can think of include less impact resistance, significantly greater cost, less customer acceptance. I think that the EO frame is somewhat of a brute-force implementation, but it looks "substantial" enough, and that's important. Customer acceptance has a lot to do with success. A frame that looks like a birdcage made of pure uni-directional fibers might be strong enough and technically interesting, but it would for sure fail as a product if it cost twice as much as the EO frame, weighed only 20 grams less than the EO skate, and folks used to "the strength of metal" were afraid of it.